They deal with it poorly. In fact most of the time it is policy that if you get married to another soldier in the unit one of you has to move and work somehere else on post. Domestic disputes are horrible for the workplace.

BF/GF stuff really gets out of hand even in units with a 70% male 30% female spilt 9which is high for many Army units.

This changes dramatically after 6 months in the desert or so... actually it tends to change in as little as 2-3 weeks when young men and women are under stress. Apples and oranges on this one honestly. It just doesn't compare. Young men + Young women + stress + mortal danger = a totally different sexual atmosphere then anything you have ever seen even if the mortal danger is removed.

Oh, I know it doesn't. That's why I don't know why it's such a big deal. I, personally, will never understand because I couldn't handle the war situation. The closest I've come is a three-week hike through the desert (Arizona). Males and females did the shower in a bucket thing. We stripped to various levels and used sponges. We weren't feeling very sexual. I know the guys looked... I know the girls looked. I guess we just didn't even care. However, no one was pointing guns at us... we had a few scorpions, but that's not quite the same thing. Not by a long shot.

So... how does the military deal with men and women?

Would it work to have gay men living with the women? (this is, btw, more of a joke statement)

So... how does the military deal with men and women?

 

They keep them seperate. It is a big logistics issue.

How often do they interact? What kind of problems did they have when women first came into the military?

The WACs were officially disbanded in 1978, which means the Army has been trying to come to terms with "coed" units ever since... the success has been varied. In terms of men and women just doing their jobs, in most cases it has worked fine. In administrative and other support units, it works about as well as it does in the business world. The more the unit deploys and goes to the field though, the more problems there are.

I'll use your time in the desert as an example. You said you know the guys looked and you knew the girls looked. You were in a hurry and besides, you only have to see these people for another couple of weeks. Now take that same situation, except when you are done with that three weeks you will be headed back to the barracks and your daily routine when you aren't in the field. In fact, you will spend a few years with them. Long enough to know who you trust and who you don't trust, and who gives you the creeps and who your "buddies" are.

Now head back to another three weeks in the field... or 18 months on a deployment. Now think about that bucket shower, you know someone is looking, and you find out it's one of the guys who gives you the creeps. Do you feel just as comfortable as you did before?

The thing is, comfort and modesty are important, but not as important as unit cohesion. Unit cohesion is kind of important in support units, but it is all important in combat arms. Unit cohesion is what makes one troop willing to put his life on the line for the guy in the next foxhole. Would you put your life on the line for the peeping Tom who gives you the creeps? (I know, unfair question). The thing is, if the guy in the next foxhole gives the infantryman the creeps, he isn't as likely to go out of his way for him... which costs lives, battles and entire wars.

Social experiments may sound good to politicians and activist groups, but only one thing should matter when it comes to the military... strength! You can have the largest, most well equipped military in the world, but if social experiements and "inclusion" takes precedence over unit cohesion, then there will be more fighting within ranks than against the enemy.

I read a statistic on the DOD website (can't find it now) that said from 1993-2000 85% of the people kicked out on "don't ask don't tell"...went directly to their commander and "came out."

So they obviously wanted out.

I don't understand the whole...the world has to know...thing.

When I was military, and single.... I worked in a squadron as the only female with 500 guys. It was GREAT!  

But frankly imho, there are just some fields in the service women shouldn't even be in.....I wouldn't want to be in a fire and have some girl come in to carry me out, same goes for infantry...and a lot of other fields.

That's my two cents.

As an addendum to this.. many of the linguists getting ut out for being gay are then immediately snapped up by civilian firms filling military positions with contractors. Same guy or gal ends up filling the position at a much higher cost.

True, just like there are people who were put out because they got too fat, couldn't pass a PT test, popped hot on a piss test, or simply just ETS'd who turn around and get jobs with civilian firms to do the same job they did in uniform.
More power (and pay) to them. ;~D

Cacto, while it is true that Para is (a) against gays in the military and ( also happens to strongly disapprove of this perverted lifestyle for religious reasons, any connection between these two facts is completely coincidental and, yes, it really is all about the showers...

Back on planet Earth, there are gays in the military, there always have been - probably always will be. You know this, I know this, he knows this. End of story.

But you put it there so easily!

That reminds me . . . SHE, look me up on myspace. Same name as my handle here.

I would look you up, but I don't know your handle.

Hmmm Chak, then please explain to me why I never gave working in ambulances, forest firefighting, doing search and rescue, running disaster recovery missions, or any other job I've done with coworkers who I knew were gay?

The fact is, in all those other jobs a person's private life was just that... private. In the military there is no distinction between a person's "private" life and "professional" life. So, while you are right, there always have been gay people in the military, they have had to keep it to themselves, or risk prosecution. Now that we have "don't ask/don't tell" some choose to keep it to themselves, others choose to flaunt it, and they don't give a flying fig about what flaunting it does to unit cohesion.

Personally, what I really don't understand is why so many gay people insist that we accept their lifestyle. Just as I accept people of other people who are in groups barred from military service, why can't it be enough that accept someone as a human being and leave it at that. For that matter, if it was about "equality", why don't we hear gay activists championing the cause of overweight, diabetic, or people who can't pass the physical training test. Or should I be like the Gay activists and figure that they must hate overweight, diabetic or people who are out of shape, simply because I agree that they should be barred from military service?

I guess the real lesson learned from the gay activists is, anyone who disgrees with a person's political agenda hates them.

When we have unisex bathrooms universally, then it will make more sense. If people shouldn't have such separation between themselves and people attracted to them sexually, why don't women want to share bathrooms, showers at the gym, etc., with men? It's a hypocritical double standard for someone like Hillary Clinton to complain about gays in the military, and then expect to have a man-free public facilities.

Tell ya what, when all the Congressional bathrooms are unisex, we should talk about making the military open to homosexuals.

Are there still stalls in these unisex bathrooms? 'Cause if so, I'm in. If not, forget it. eeewwww.

I hadn't thought about the inability to separate personal space/life with work space/life. My job doesn't separate very well, which means there are certain things I am not allowed to do. I have a kind of "morality" clause that affects my personal behavior. This is probably about 1/4000 that people in the military face.

So, to make things "fair", shouldn't everyone be forced to keep everything related to their sex lives secret... no matter what orientation? Or is that already expected? Or, something similar to that. Like Tova said, don't discuss sex at work. Or is this too pie in the sky?



I try not to, but I'm so good at it.

Yes, there are stalls, but still you don't see them because in general people don't want them. You also hear people toss fits about transgendered people using their chosen sex's bathrooms. Isn't it utterly hypocritical for us to expect a separation and then pretend that it is somehow bigoted for the military to expect it?

I'm trying to imagine the difficulties you'd have if you imposed unisex bathrooms right now. Would women and men be bigoted to feel awkward or threatened? I don't see why a military person wouldn't feel the same showering with people who would find them the object of sexual interest, too.

Isn't it hypocritical of us to expect anything else?

I have a gay family member in the military. I wish I could ask this relative about the experience he/she has had thus far...and how it's been trying to keep his/her sexuality a secret.

But I dare not ask...it's none of my business really.